MOO-cows Mailing List Archive
On Fri, 2 Aug 1996, Richard Godard wrote:
> One problem that I experience those days is catching errors, analyse the
> value/message and raise() it again if I can't do anything with the value...
> it works nicely, except the traceback that result is not as informative :(
> I was wondering if we could have a reraise() bf (or reraise; statement)
> that would continue the raising (and error catching) process as if the
> except clause containing the bf call/statement has not caight it?
The C++ exception-catching syntax (which was not the original basis for
MOO exception syntax) has a form of the throw statement which is of the
and may only be used inside an exception handler. This performs
essentially what you were talking about and allows "partial exception
handling" and other useful features. Basically, it re-throws the
exception that was being handled. This might be a bit of a hack to the
stack-unwinding syntax, but it would probably be doable and certainly
could be useful.
- Re: raise()
- From: "Robert J. Brown" <email@example.com>
- From: Richard Godard <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject Index |